Globalisation is not predominantly a
force for good. This is because there is a
fundamental imbalance of power in the
globalising world. Richer countries get
richer, poor countries seem to get
poorer.

 
Globalisation can be very good.
Peaceful global protests against
globalised injustice are the best
globalisation one can imagine.

 
The Earth is an amazing place
because of its diversity – culture,
history, arts, etc. These will all be lost
when we have a Global Empire in
place. Surely this is what we are
working towards. Totalitarianism on a
global scale.

 
Globalisation is a modern method of
slaveholding and colonisation of third
world countries.

 
Get real, everybody: globalisation has
been going on since the Industrial
Revolution. If third world countries
sorted themselves out, then they
would be able to compete. Why
should this be our problem?

 
Tell me, how is possible and fair for a
small country or poor country like India
or Pakistan to compete with a rich and
resourceful country like USA? The fruits
of globalisation will only be eaten by no
more than 50,000 people in the world
(who are multinational companies and of
course politicians).

 
Globalisation is indeed a great and
inevitable event if it is done on a fair
and equal basis only. Right now it is far
from that and only exists between rich
countries.

 
The logical conclusion of globalisation
will see the whole world having a
western quality of life and shame on
you for trying to block it. The main
downside of globalisation is that
Bangkok will look like Delhi, will look
like London, etc.

 
Globalisation is like many things, good,
neutral and bad – it depends on the
intentions of those in control. People will
be helped and people will be hindered.
There will be winners and losers.
Ultimately it will be implemented because
it cannot be stopped. It is now only a
matter of how well we manage it and the
ethical integrity with which it is
administered.